Acceleration/braking times of YOUR bike

Welcome to MotoHouston.com! You are currently viewing our forums as a guest which gives you limited access to the community. By joining our free community you will have access to great discounts from our sponsors, the ability to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content, free email, classifieds, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, join our community!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

What people should or shouldn't do is irrelevant to this, as the fact of the matter is, people do it. I have no contention with people breaking stupid, outdated laws, and even if I did, why would that matter?

But it's data to choose, ostensibly, which bike to buy that will be generally governed by said laws regardless of your opinion of them.

In more crass terms: who gives a that a 600 has a top speed of 155 while a 1k has a top speed of 165 when both will land your in jail meaning you can't ride said bike to even 5.

....UNLESSSSSSSS...we're talking about race bikes. In which case, wait a tick, who gives a what the top speed is because no straightaway on a racetrack is long enough to reach it!

Wait, you want 100-0 too!? Who the does that ANYWHERE street or track!?

__________________A motorcycle is a joy machine. It's a machine of wonders, a metal bird, a motorized prosthetic. It's light and dark and shiny and dirty and warm and cold lapping over each other; it's a conduit of grace, it's a catalyst for bonding the gritty and the holy.

I missed the part where mr. P analyzed a Kawasaki and aprilia from my videos? Could you quote that for me?

He answered the original question is what I meant. I already thanked him for finding data that I couldn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArkansasDave

We all know what data you and think it's stupid and already available since Mr. P used already available data to say how faster it is. So while you thought it was a super cool idea, your data collection method is flawed and it wasn't original research or anything worth going to jail over.

I never said it was a super cool idea, and saying the data collection method is flawed before it is used is to collect anything and before that data is then used, is premature, to say the least.

What people should or shouldn't do is irrelevant to this, as the fact of the matter is, people do it. I have no contention with people breaking stupid, outdated laws, and even if I did, why would that matter?

Going twice the speed limit is an outdated law that has no logic behind it? And if you haven't seen people doing your tests what makes you think they do it.

But it's data to choose, ostensibly, which bike to buy that will be generally governed by said laws regardless of your opinion of them.

In more crass terms: who gives a that a 600 has a top speed of 155 while a 1k has a top speed of 165 when both will land your in jail meaning you can't ride said bike to even 5.

By that token, 600cc supersports are utterly unnecessary, but as already stated, plenty of people aren't terribly concerned about posted speed limits, and I think you'll find super bike riders have a rather high percentage of people who fall under the category of "no given for your speed limit."

That you find 1000s useless is apparent. Your bias is blazingly bright, dude.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chubby Racer

Wait, you want 100-0 too!? Who the does that ANYWHERE street or track!?

Going twice the speed limit is an outdated law that has no logic behind it? And if you haven't seen people doing your tests what makes you think they do it.

There aren't many instances where going up to 120 from a dead stop is directly applicable, but it is a way to measure the differences between 2 classes of bikes. Similar to quarter mile times to judge acceleration.

The Germans have been showing everyone how to have a highway entirely without speed limits for years

Well you're question was answered by magazine data which I believe was suggested early on. Now that you know that an s1000rr is 83% faster than an r6 will you do a cost benefit analysis to see if it's worth the extra price?

I forgot to mention that the autobahn has been continuously more restricted and have very strict avg speed cameras on 80% of the roads.

I fail to see how any data you collect in this manner can be relevant in any instance with so many variables at play. Rider weight, skill, mods are all going to skew any results you get. Not to mention a rider accurately recording the info you seek while trying to attain 10/10 performance, as I'm sure has been repeated throughout this thread (I've only read the first two pages to see the redundancy). You're asking an unreasonable question only to get unreliable results.

Well you're question was answered by magazine data which I believe was suggested early on. Now that you know that an s1000rr is 83% faster than an r6 will you do a cost benefit analysis to see if it's worth the extra price?

It wasn't for me. I'd get an s1000rr over an r6 just for the electronics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArkansasDave

I forgot to mention that the autobahn has been continuously more restricted and have very strict avg speed cameras on 80% of the roads.

That is depressing if true. I know there are still stretches of it people fly down at or nearly 3x our speed limit.

I fail to see how any data you collect in this manner can be relevant in any instance with so many variables at play. Rider weight, skill, mods are all going to skew any results you get. Not to mention a rider accurately recording the info you seek while trying to attain 10/10 performance, as I'm sure has been repeated throughout this thread (I've only read the first two pages to see the redundancy). You're asking an unreasonable question only to get unreliable results.

Are you wanting clarification, or did you just want to add to the redundancy?

OP... Have you ever ridden on a race track and or ridden various bikes on the track I.E stock as well as competitive race bike?

If so I respect your opinion to exclude such data as valid data towards your original proposal. If you haven't I find it quite "ignorant" on your part to claim riding a bike on the track in regards to Braking performance etc holds no wieght in comparison to the street (at the speeds and conditions you are suggesting)

__________________
"Honestly, you just take a deep breath and say It!" - Johnny Knoxville

For street use they absolutely are. Not only can you not even get into the performance window of one while keeping your driver's license but they're horribly uncomfortable over any kind of distance.

__________________A motorcycle is a joy machine. It's a machine of wonders, a metal bird, a motorized prosthetic. It's light and dark and shiny and dirty and warm and cold lapping over each other; it's a conduit of grace, it's a catalyst for bonding the gritty and the holy.

OP... Have you ever ridden on a race track and or ridden various bikes on the track I.E stock as well as competitive race bike?

If so I respect your opinion to exclude such data as valid data towards your original proposal. If you haven't I find it quite "ignorant" on your part to claim riding a bike on the track in regards to Braking performance etc holds no wieght in comparison to the street (at the speeds and conditions you are suggesting)

It isn't that track data is invalid because it is track data, it is just OFTEN invalid because the conditions are usually hidden, or vastly different from a stock setup on the street. How different? I'm not sure. It would be nice to test, but I'd need the stock data, still. So in the end, it is either invalid because it is too different, or it is invalid because I don't know how much it varies from what I'm after: street data.

The videos I was seeing also rarely had the rpm and mph clearly visible, so I couldn't tell if the bike was really being used. I've watched a guy on an HP4 get passed by a GSX-R 600... on a straight... lolwat? Thankfully I could see the RPM, so it was easily apparent that the guy on the HP4 was a total newb or wasn't trying.

So... you could probably analyze some track footage to see things like 60-120 times, but it'd be obnoxious at best, and futile at worst. You might have better luck doing it, cause I personally found it unworkable. The really useless track data (for this comparison) was lap times.

For street use they absolutely are. Not only can you not even get into the performance window of one while keeping your driver's license but they're horribly uncomfortable over any kind of distance.

Comfort is relative. I switched bikes with an RSV4 owner for a ride... after a short bit of traffic, we turned off, because we both wanted to get back on our own bikes because we found them more comfortable.

My brother can't ride cruisers for more than a few minutes because of his back, but he rode a ZX6 from Houston to Dallas, then went back to Houston a few hours later, without much discomfort.

Are you wanting clarification, or did you just want to add to the redundancy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chubby Racer

For street use they absolutely are. Not only can you not even get into the performance window of one while keeping your driver's license but they're horribly uncomfortable over any kind of distance.

I asked you no question, for you to ask if I want clarification is,... Well,.. Potato. I simply stated that your "question" is unreasonable since you are trying to take rider and skill level out of that equation. You have your hard data from the mag reviews, track times, etc. now if I'm to include what I've experienced on my bike. I've outrun a Ferrari 360 Modena, Aston Martin vanquish, dodge viper, Porsche 911 turbo, amongst other highly modified lower end cars (all on a closed runway amongst friends) I can only imagine newer bikes being a bit better than mine. I have a stage 1 jet, intake, and bolt on can only. Have travelled from Horseshoe Bay Resort to North Austin (35 and some road near cedar park) in less than 30 minutes. Never doing that again! You won't find the data you are looking for though, you are being to specific for something containing so many variables.

Comfort is relative. I switched bikes with an RSV4 owner for a ride... after a short bit of traffic, we turned off, because we both wanted to get back on our own bikes because we found them more comfortable.

My brother can't ride cruisers for more than a few minutes because of his back, but he rode a ZX6 from Houston to Dallas, then went back to Houston a few hours later, without much discomfort.

Generalities, kid. Your edge cases don't disprove them. For the general populous, folding yourself in half, and perching your on a 1/4" of foam for any length of time is uncomfortable.

__________________A motorcycle is a joy machine. It's a machine of wonders, a metal bird, a motorized prosthetic. It's light and dark and shiny and dirty and warm and cold lapping over each other; it's a conduit of grace, it's a catalyst for bonding the gritty and the holy.